FDA Why wouldn't we go on the offensive, right now?

[Jman8]

About 7 months ago the FDA released its proposed regulations and many of us vapers squirmed, thinking the worst case scenario was about to be visited upon us. "Join CASAA" was the rally cry. Or "don't worry, the black market will take over" another possible view on things. And yet, with the change in Congress, it is now seemingly much more tough to see how FDA proposals could be enacted into rule of law anytime soon.

Yet, in 2016, if POTUS remains in party it is (the one that signed FSPTCA into law) and Congress swings back the other way, then we (vaping enthusiasts) just bought ourselves some time in 2014. That is all.

Why wouldn't the politically aware vaper go on the offense right now and have Congress, in 2015, revisit TCA to exempt eCigs from that? Have Congress instruct the federal government to find another way to (reasonably) regulate eCigs and stop misusing TCA as the way to control the eCig issue?

In a year from now, the political talk will be mostly to only about next POTUS and vaping will get pushed down to #143rd issue on the list of concerns for the American people. IMO, it is the vaping enthusiasts job to push that up, right now, to a top 15 consideration, and to have Congress dictate the terms on how the fight will look going forward.

What say you?

 

[Norrin]

I think your between a rock and a hard place, just like the rest of us, the anti e-cig brigade has made a lot of headway with nothing behind them apart from a link to smoking (it looks like smoking and we were smokers). The general public has fallen for the lies and how do you turn this round? All political parties will go with the flow regardless of the evidence and if the majority of the public think vaping is bad then hitting us hard is a vote winner. If you fight back it could help, but it often doesn't as you can then look like the bad guy making things up to support your case. I really don't think the way BT acted in the past is going to do us any favours either as they knew smoking was bad but continually gave evidence showing that it was safe and as I have already said we're tarred with the same brush.
Not saying to give up and bury your head in the sand hoping that everything will be fine, just can't think of anyway that we are going to come out of this with anything like a decent outcome.

 

[Jman8]

I think if we say "yes, eCigs ought to be reasonably regulated" we win on the general public front. And if we say that eCigs ought to be exempt from TCA, then that is just political maneuvering that general public likely doesn't care about, but that sends BG back to drawing table to come up with new proposed regulations, that are likely more reasonable than what TCA offers for vaping.

 

[Nate760]

I think if we say "yes, eCigs ought to be reasonably regulated" we win on the general public front.

We shouldn't be making statements that support (even implicitly) the notion that vapor products are "unregulated." They're already subject to the same laws that govern the manufacture and distribution of every other consumer product. What we're actually talking about is not regulation per se, but product-specific health regulation.

 

[Jman8]

We shouldn't be making statements that support (even implicitly) the notion that vapor products are "unregulated." They're already subject to the same laws that govern the manufacture and distribution of every other consumer product. What we're actually talking about is not regulation per se, but product-specific health regulation.

Okay, so this takes away from the point I made to appease the general public, but changes nothing about us remaining on the defensive until Dems retake Congress and try to invoke deeming regulations.

Main point of this thread is to go on offensive. Some vapers seem to think now that Pubs are in office, the regulations will go bye bye forever. I beg to differ and strikes me as us engaging in ongoing game of defense.

No wonder some vapers get so worried by what BG may (or may not) do.

 

[Nate760]

Main point of this thread is to go on offensive. Some vapers seem to think now that Pubs are in office, the regulations will go bye bye forever. I beg to differ and strikes me as us engaging in ongoing game of defense.

You're absolutely right on this point, and it can't be emphasized enough. We have, potentially, a full two-year window in which there's unlikely to be an interruption in the legal/political status quo. If we fail to capitalize on it, and use it to affect a meaningful shift in public opinion, we will have lost because we didn't deserve to win.

 

[Jman8]

You're absolutely right on this point, and it can't be emphasized enough. We have, potentially, a full two-year window in which there's unlikely to be an interruption in the legal/political status quo. If we fail to capitalize on it, and use it to affect a meaningful shift in public opinion, we will have lost because we didn't deserve to win.

I'm thinking it is less than 2 year window. Come Nov. 2015, election (and ambition) will take over national politics. Vaping will go down on the scale of priorities, even for vapers.

We need to move on this anytime between now and I would say Aug. 2015 at the very latest.

I agree with your final point - we use this as a time to make a meaningful shift in public opinion (and political maneuvering) for vaping, or 2 to 6 years from now when ANTZ leaning Dems try to do same thing that they tried in 2014, then well, I see vapers and vaping advocates as them who were irresponsible in first half of 2015 when they had golden opportunity to make a meaningful shift in the political game.

 

[mountaingal]

Yes, let's get our game on and try to keep TCA "out" of our vaping! I think the public may be catching on that ecigs may not be so bad, I see lots of VUSE ads on prime time TV. And it is supporting "our" cause, because it makes vaping more mainstream.
If the FDA goes strict, and controls all the aspects of e-cigs we are screwed. But, if they just want to regulate the juice, you can guess that it will be taxed.......a lot. Local and state governments are losing so much money as the sale of cigs keeps dropping. Remember, this is money that is ALREADY spent on infrastructure, roads, trains, etc. Our goverment needs us to be addicted, and pay those high taxes: one way or another!

 

[Jman8]

As I see it:

A - things stand about as they are now where standard consumer regulations exist, and BG may do something, but are more prone to act and get what they want with a US senate that is made up of a Democrat majority. As things stand right now, it may be 2 more years before FDA regulations are invoked. Part of this though is that states will act (or react) accordingly.

B - the federal version of regulating vaping pursues a different course where FDA and pending regulations aren't mentioned in same breath. Why? Because the 2015 version of Congress has exempted eCigs from TCA and while FDA may pursue pursue their agenda, they realize they will have been shot down twice from their agenda.

With our well funded, and well established adversaries (ANTZ), I currently do not see a situation where eCigs go "unregulated." We either wait 2 or so years for ANTZ version of regulations or we utilize the political momentum to change the course of what regulations ought to look like for vaping. If Pub controlled Congress can act favorably toward vaping (or rather act reasonably), then so can a bunch of Pub governors and/or red states.

Even with that last paragraph written, I don't see currently proposed FDA regulations as exactly "ANTZ friendly." But if we remain on defense and cross our fingers hoping that 2 years buys us magical momentum, I see ANTZ taking the opportunity to make proposed regulations even stronger/harsher. Media will help with that over the next 2 years. Plus junk science.

 

[AndriaD]

We shouldn't be making statements that support (even implicitly) the notion that vapor products are "unregulated." They're already subject to the same laws that govern the manufacture and distribution of every other consumer product. What we're actually talking about is not regulation per se, but product-specific health regulation.

Yes, I agree; I just started vaping this year, but I can see that vaping has been moving as fast as PCs in the 90s, just amazing leaps and bounds in the technology, and it has all been "regulated" by the consumers themselves -- what they need, what they want, what they will not settle for, whether it's hardware or eliquids. Just to judge from the amazing growth of this industry, I'd say vapers are doing a bang-up job "regulating" it themselves, simply as any other consumer-driven consumer product.

As I pointed out recently in another post, there is no more reason for the FDA to be anymore concerned about or with e-cigs than they are with coffee, tea, or cola, or Vivarin or Excedrin or any of the other foods and OTC medications that contain caffeine. I am sick and tired of them deciding arbitrarily that they don't like some substance and thus will make us pay thru the nose to get it -- let them do that with sugar, if they're so all-fired concerned about "public health," because obesity and diabetes are FAR greater problems in America than anything having to do with nicotine.

I see no reason at all for us to simply lie down and let them fascist all over us, just because they are ignorant and greedy.

Andria

 

[Jman8]

I am sick and tired of them deciding arbitrarily that they don't like some substance and thus will make us pay thru the nose to get it -- let them do that with sugar, if they're so all-fired concerned about "public health," because obesity and diabetes are FAR greater problems in America than anything having to do with nicotine.

I see no reason at all for us to simply lie down and let them fascist all over us, just because they are ignorant and greedy.

Andria

Please don't let them do that with sugar. I'd rather win the debate with reason than with them taking potshots at the most addictive substance of them all, hoping to increase their funding and job security awhile longer.

 

[AndriaD]

Please don't let them do that with sugar. I'd rather win the debate with reason than with them taking potshots at the most addictive substance of them all, hoping to increase their funding and job security awhile longer.

Heh... you may be right about its addictive nature, I know I'd be very hard pressed to do without it -- but there are so many people who apparently have zero sense of proportion or restraint in its use, and most of them seem to be complaining about their diabetes, never imagining that if they just LOST WEIGHT, maybe their diabetes wouldn't be so bad (or maybe they wouldn't have become diabetic in the first place). That awful disease positively rampages thru my family, but so far, at the age of 53, I've managed to not become diabetic -- probably because I have learned to eat properly, and always watched my weight very carefully -- most people seem quite unable to do that. Smokers who are actually trying to do something positive for their health should not bear the brunt of the "sin tax" -- it should be distributed also among those who'd rather complain about their diabetes than do anything positive about it.

Andria

 

[Maiar]

I'm not trying to pick a fight here, quite the opposite in fact. When it comes to certain political and moral issues, say marriage equality and abortions and all that, Canada generally has figured out what we're gonna do while America is still arguing about it. But with other things, most noticeable to me, are things that Health Canada should be figuring out own its own that they don't. They're gonna go with what the FDA and the Americans think like they do with so many other things. I think you guys should get out there and fight. Lots of countries will follow (as they should) Americas example. If you guys manage to successfully lobby against flavor bans and total bans and all the ignorance going on with vaping, I feel that countries like mine will take heed and take similar approaches. So, long story short, go get em guys!

P.S I don't give two ....s what your opinion is on marriage or abortions, I'm not getting into that here, my point was just that sometimes Canada blazes its own path and sometimes waits to see what you guys are gonna do. That is all.

 

[Nate760]

When it comes to certain political and moral issues, say marriage equality and abortions and all that, Canada generally has figured out what we're gonna do while America is still arguing about it.

Canada doesn't have the same streak of religious and moral puritanism running through its history and culture that we do, and generally speaking, they're better off for it.

But with other things, most noticeable to me, are things that Health Canada should be figuring out own its own that they don't. They're gonna go with what the FDA and the Americans think like they do with so many other things.

It's really depressing when you read through the list of countries that have enacted bans or onerous restrictions on vapor products, and nearly all of them cite the FDA and CDC's reports as a primary motivation for doing so. When our government gets things wrong, the effects are often more disastrous outside our borders than within them.

 

[EBates]

Silly me but, since the FDA and CDC are providing the Ten Commandments of what is good/bad (except for some obvious oversights). Wouldn't a concerted effort to discredit them be in order.
I'm sure you've seem the commercials for the latest FDA approved BP products, you know the ones with long list of warnings and side effects. Yet, vaping is the scourge that they attack without mercy.
Or seen the news of our CDC handling of the Ebola outbreak, their handling of the VA hospitals.

Would it not be the appropriate time to 'turn on the kitchen light and count the roaches'. Discrediting your opponent has been a successful political tactic for centuries.
Silly me, what was I thinkin'

 

[Nate760]

Would it not be the appropriate time to 'turn on the kitchen light and count the roaches'. Discrediting your opponent has been a successful political tactic for centuries.

When your opponent has an annual budget of $4.36 billion, and wields the full authority of the President of the United States, discrediting them is a lot easier than actually disempowering them. If you get Congress on your side, you can apply pressure for a change in leadership, but this often has little practical effect even if you achieve it.

 

[chopdoc]

I seen this many times on ECF. People calling for action or laying out the battle plans but something that always seems to fail to get mentioned is how many of you actually took the time to sit down and email your elected offcials about this? How does anyone expect our elected officials to back us up or even remove vaping as being listed with tobacco if no one can take the five minutes to write there elected officials and attempt to educate them.

We all know smoking is a killer. Many of us have sucess stories from vaping. Why not share them with those who can change policies. Why not explain why vaping is far better for people over smoking and is proving to be better at smoking cessation that anything else out there. Or people can sit back and do nothing but complain. There is a bunch of newly elected officials now. Contact them, tell them your sucess stories. Tell them why you dont agree with vaping being catagorized with tobacco. Any anti vaping officials, contact them too. Let them know how vaping changed your life for the better. If you want something done then start with what you can do.

 

[Maiar]

I've emailed my Member of the Legislative Assembly about it. And also the Minister of Health from the Federal government and his deputy minister. I've not heard anything back of course. But they're busy people so I expect delays. I'm going to email the Premier of my province and the Prime Minister in Ottawa too. I don't really want to email the PM though lol

 

[chopdoc]

I've emailed my Member of the Legislative Assembly about it. And also the Minister of Health from the Federal government and his deputy minister. I've not heard anything back of course. But they're busy people so I expect delays. I'm going to email the Premier of my province and the Prime Minister in Ottawa too. I don't really want to email the PM though lol

I have contacted both Federal and State lawmakers and always receive a reply including snail mail from them. Even the white house replied to my emails. I dont know how Canada is But I would expect a reply from any representative.

 

[Rickajho]

I think if we say "yes, eCigs ought to be reasonably regulated" we win on the general public front. And if we say that eCigs ought to be exempt from TCA, then that is just political maneuvering that general public likely doesn't care about, but that sends BG back to drawing table to come up with new proposed regulations, that are likely more reasonable than what TCA offers for vaping.

I think, after listening to a couple insightful commentaries on the recent elections, what "we" get is what whoever puts the most campaign money behind this issue wants. How much do we, as a consolidated organization, put behind what "we" want? A nickel. How much does BP, BT or institutions that want their research and "non-profit" salaried positions to keep rolling along cough up to support candidates?. A hell of a lot more than we can or do. Until "we" get fed up with the best government money can buy and do something about this campaign donation insanity we don't have much say in this matter.